Israel, Judea and Samaria (occupied territories?), and Gaza. All these are the real Jewish and Israeli birthright, from the beginning. A God-given birthright, as Trump should recognize.. Which now-in-force international law and treaties recognize, going back to the San Remo Resolution. Even UN Resolution 242 couldn't change that. Disengagement from any of them spells disaster. A two-state solution violates this birthright. (As a candidate for ambassador clearly understands.) Why won't the Likud Party protect this birthright? Why do some accuse champions of Judea-Samaria of having crypto-Nazi tendencies? What can dispel the confusion on this point? And will The New York Times correct their own record in this regard? Or does a generation of the unteachable prevent a properly sober discussion? And now a new battle cry sounds: no taxation without annexation. Where is the proper statecraft Israel needs? Note: Israel is also a safer place for Christians than any other country in the Middle East. Israel, Judea and Samaria (occupied territories?), and Gaza. All these are the real Jewish and Israeli birthright, from the beginning. A God-given birthright, as Trump should recognize.. Which now-in-force international law and treaties recognize, going back to the San Remo Resolution. Even UN Resolution 242 couldn't change that. Disengagement from any of them spells disaster. A two-state solution violates this birthright. (As a candidate for ambassador clearly understands.) Why won't the Likud Party protect this birthright? Why do some accuse champions of Judea-Samaria of having crypto-Nazi tendencies? What can dispel the confusion on this point? And will The New York Times correct their own record in this regard? Or does a generation of the unteachable prevent a properly sober discussion? And now a new battle cry sounds: no taxation without annexation. Where is the proper statecraft Israel needs? Note: Israel is also a safer place for Christians than any other country in the Middle East.

One-sided cognitive dissonance

Talks between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a Jew, and Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas, a Muslim Arab, give rise to the subject of “cognitive dissonance.” Avigdor Bonchek provides an excellent summary of the subject in his book Studying the Torah: A Guide to In-Depth Interpretation. Thus:

Cognitive dissonance: eight points

(1)  “When nations talk with each other, they will not make war with each other.” (This does not apply to the non-nation misnamed the “Palestinians.”

(2)  “When individuals talk with each other, they are less likely to bear grudges against each other.” [This does not apply to Mahmoud Abbas when he talks to Benjamin Netanyahu].

(3)  “There is something about the human psyche that is repelled by the dissonance created when talking with someone we hate.” “Psychologists have a name for it; their term is cognitive dissonance.” This human tendency is lacking in Mahmoud Abbas.

Palestinians: experts in one-sided cognitive dissonance(4)  “When a person’s outer behavior is not in accord with his inner feelings, dissonance and tension are created, and as a consequence, the need to resolve the dissonance and the tension.” This need is not manifested objectively in the behavior of Muslims vis-à-vis Jews.

(5) “Talking draws together, hatred tears apart.” This does not describe the behavior of Muslims steeped in taqiyya (dissembling) who talk to Jews like Netanyahu, who appears anxious to talk to Muslims like Mahmoud Abbas. The asymmetrical attitude of the two sides is obvious.

(6) “If one perforce talks with an enemy with whom he would rather not talk, he is engaged in dissonant behavior – hating someone yet talking with him.” This does not unambiguously describe the attitude of Netanyahu, who feels compelled to talk to Abbas, and whose hatred of Abbas, if it exists, is well concealed – thus resulting in cognitive dissonance.

(7) “The psychological need to act in consonance with our feelings and to feel in line with our actions motivates us to into aligning our feelings with our overt actions. In the case of talking with an enemy, this would be done by having the hatred dispelled; this extricates us from the psychological tension. We now feel (friendly) in concert with the way we act. In sum, talking with our enemy reduces our hatred toward him.” This seems to apply to Netanyahu (to Israel’s grave disadvantage), but most emphatically not to Abbas!

(8) The conclusion is obvious:

Jewish politicians should NOT negotiate with Muslims!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Israel, Middle East, terrorism, war

Comment

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.



© All Rights Reserved. Conservative News and Views.

Back to Top